MZUMBE UNIVERSITY DAR ES SALAAM COLLEGE CAMPUS

M.Sc. - MPA PROGRAMME

PUB: 500 (PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION)

INDIVIDUAL ASSIGNMENT: TERM PAPER

STUDENT NAME: ALBERT GASPER MSANDO

REG. NO: 230050060/T.18.

LECTURER: DR. ANDREW SULLE

Question:

With supporting examples, discuss the importance and relevance of the

comparative approach in the study of Public Administration.

 “Modern formulations are necessary even in defense of very ancient truths. Not because of

any alleged anachronism in the old ideas – the Beatitudes remain the essential statements of

the Western code – but because the idiom of life is always changing."

― William F. Buckley, Jr.

1.0 Introduction

Public Administration is both a field of political governance or practice and

academic discipline. As a field of practice, Public Administration is as old as the

history of humankind. It was practiced before there was a self-conscious study and

teaching of Public Administration. 1 Over some time, Public Administration has

evolved both as a process of administration and an academic discipline. This paper

focuses on its evolution as social science and the importance and relevance of the

comparative approach to the study of Public Administration. As any other systematic

study, Public Administration is subjected to the same demands of a scientific inquiry

when it comes to the tools employed in the formulation or reformulation of theories or

assumptions. In preparation for this work, secondary data from available literature

has been relied upon. Several scholarly works, published and unpublished, have

proliferated the academic field defining, explaining and describing what Public

Administration is, what it ought to be, and how it should be for more than fifty years.

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
1
Dwight Waldo (1963), Comparative Public Administration: Prologue, Performance, Problems and
Promise, The Indian Journal of Political Science, Vol. 24, No. 3, Indian Political Science
Association, p. 178, available https://www.jstor.org/stable/41853973, accessed 30-12-2019.

! 2!
1.1 Conceptualization

1.1.1 The Definition Quagmire of Public Administration

Discussions of Public Administration are troubled by a problem that may be well

recognized at the outset: The same phrase is used to refer to the self-conscious study,

research, teaching, etc.; and to the process, institutions, etc., that is ostensible focus

and interest of the self-conscious study (Waldo 1963).2 This double usage of the

phrase makes it evident that there are various definitions of Public Administration

serving different purposes depending on the context. It has been asserted that “public

administration has no generally accepted definition” because the scope of the subject

is so great and so debatable that it is easier to explain than define (Kernaghan,

Kenneth 2010).3 Adejare & Olla (2014), while trying to examine the theoretical

definition of Public Administration, referred to at least nine definitions put forward by

different authors. Ironically at the end, they were resigned to the conclusion that “it is

obvious that there is no universally acceptable definition of Public Administration”.4

Despite the lack of a universal consensus on one all-inclusive definition of Public

Administration, the body of definitions available helps to understand what it includes

or how to explain it in general terms. The attempts to first define the words 'public'

and 'administration' separately using the standard definition from dictionaries seems

to simplify the task of understanding what is or what consists of Public

Administration (See Khan 2008; Marume 2014).

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
2
Dwight Waldo, (1968), in his Article, Public Administration, in the Journal of Politics, Vol. 30, No.
2, at p. 443 available at https://www.jstor.org/stable/2128449, accessed on 30-12-2019.
3
Kenneth Kernaghan, in his unpublished online Article, Public Administration, The Canadian
Encyclopedia, posted online on 07-02-2006, last edited 17-072015, available at
https://thecanadianencyclopedia.ca/en/article/public-administration, accessed on 19-12-2019.
4
Aderibigbe Adejare and John Oluwafemi Olla, (2014), Towards A Theoretical Definition of Public
Administration, Journal of Management 2319-7668, 16. 65-70. 10.9790/487X-16356570.

! 3!
 To define public administration, what is ‘public’ and ‘administration’ need to be

explained. By ‘public’, it means the government and ‘administration’ means getting

things done. The English word ‘administer’ is derived from a combination of two

Latin words ad and ministrate meaning ‘to serve’ or ‘to manage’.5 Dimock6 defined

Public Administration as the fulfilment or enforcement of public policy as declared by

the competent authorities. It deals with the problems and powers of the organization

and techniques of management involved in carrying out the laws and policies

formulated by the policy-making agencies of government. Public administration is the

law in action. It is the executive side of a government.

Waldo7 on the other hand defined Public Administration as the art and science of

management as applied to the affairs of the state. The process of public administration

consists of the actions involved in affecting the intent or desire of a government. It is

thus, the continuously active, ‘business’ part of a government, concerned with

carrying out the law as made by legislative bodies (or other authoritative agents) and

interpreted by the courts, through the process of organization and management. The

field of study – putatively a science or discipline – of public administration focuses

upon public administration as a process.

In the upshot, it is contended that Public Administration is both an art and a

science. It is an organized activity or process, requiring skills and techniques to

organize people, by the executive arm of the government responsible for the

formulation and execution of public policies to meet the ends of the government or a

common goal. As White famously surmised it, “the management of men and

materials in the accomplishment of the purposes of the state”.

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
5
Ibid.
6
Marshall Edward Dimock (1903 - Nov. 14, 1991) was an American political scientist, Professor of
Public Administration at the Department of Government at New York University.
7
Dwight Waldo (1963).

! 4!
1.1.2 Comparative Public Administration

Comparative Public Administration originated from the premise that limitations of

the American administrative situation cannot be overcome until it is compared with

the experience of others (Riggs 1998). Comparative Public Administration is the

study of administrative concepts and processes across organizations, nations and

cultures (Jreisat 2011). Its main concern is not only to establish similarities and

differences among administrative systems and functions, but also to establish general

patterns and to discover and define successful or unsuccessful practices (Jreisat 2011).

The ideal of science is to achieve a systematic interrelation of facts.8 The scientific

method attempts to achieve this ideal by experimentation, observation, logical

arguments from accepted postulates and a combination of these three in varying

proportions.9 In the field of Public Administration the comparative approach has been

an important thrust (Jreisat 2011).

1.1.3 Comparative Approach

In its scientific form, the comparative approach consists of the systematic

detection, identification, classification, measurement and interpretation of similarities

and differences among phenomena. 10 It goes beyond uncovering similarities and

differences, or establishing what is universal, related or unique.11 Comparison is a

fundamental tool of analysis in scientific studies (Jreisat 2011). To ‘compare’ is to

examine similarities and differences simultaneously.12

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
8
C. R. Kothari and Gaurav Garg, (2019), Research Methodology; Methods and Techniques, 4th
Edition, New Age International Publishers, London, United Kingdom.
9
Ibid.!
10
J. Boddewyn, (1965), The Comparative Approach to the Study of Business Administration, The
Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 8, No. 4, Special Theme: Comparative Studies, pp. 261 –
267, available at https://www.jstor.org/stable/255342, accessed on 02-01-2020.
11
See. n. 13. C. Kerr et al.,. Industrialism and Industrial Man, New York: Oxford University Press,
1964), p.10.
12
Waldo (1963), n. 1.

! 5!
 The effort is bent towards two leading ends, one to discover, define and

differentiate the ‘stuff’ (politics or administrative) to be compared and two, to develop

the criteria for differentiation that are useful in ordering and analyzing the ‘stuff’ once

it has been identified.13 The importance and relevance of the comparative approach in

the study of Public Administration can be gleaned from the latter’s evolution.

1.1.4 Public Administration as an Academic Discipline

The development of Public Administration, as an academic discipline, dates back

to the times when the United States and some European countries transited from the

so-called 'spoilsman' system characterizing their Public Administration in the 19th

century to the merit-based system brought about by political changes of the time such

as the civil service reform movement in the United States, which gained strength in

1870. 14 It is noteworthy to mention that before the Twentieth century, Public

Administration in the West was inherently inefficient and marred with what has been

referred by Waldo (1963) as amateurism or democratic chaos.15

It was during this time Woodrow Wilson (1887) wrote his paper, The Study of

Administration, which was then followed by the subsequent publications by Frank J.

Goodnow (1900), Politics and Administration, and Leonard D. White (1926),

Introduction to the Study of Public Administration. Woodrow laid down the initial

foundation of the ‘science of administration’. He wrote that the object of

administrative study is to discover, first, what government can properly and

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
13
Ibid.
14
See, Paul T. Stafford, (1935), The New Amateur in Public Administration, American Political
Science Review, 29(2), 257-269, doi:10.2307/1947506 available at https://www.cambridge.org,
accessed on 31-12-2019.
15
Ibid., n. 2.

! 6!
successfully do. And secondly, how it can do those proper things with the utmost

possible efficiency and at the least possible cost of money and of energy.16

He stated that “it is needful to take some account of what others have done in the

same line; that is to say, of the history of the study”.17 His contention resulted to

political/administration dichotomy conceptualization. He stated that “most important

to be observed is the truth already so much and so fortunately insisted upon by our

civil service reformers namely, that administration lies outside the proper sphere of

politics”.18 (Emphasis added)

From early on, comparative method was touted as essential in the field of Public

Administration. He asserted that “nowhere in the whole field of politics, it would

seem, could the use of the historical comparative method be made more safely than in

the science of administration”.19 He further observed, “Without comparative studies

in government we cannot rid ourselves of the misconceptions that administration

stands upon an essentially different basis in a democratic state from that on which it

stands in the non-democratic state”.20 (Emphasis added).

The rise of the second generation of scholars in 1940s led to a vibrant academic

activity that led to fierce criticisms of the ‘general principles’ and assumptions that

were developed in the 1920s and 1930s. They were purporting to tell one how he

ought or must organize and operate if he wished to achieve ends sought by

organizations efficiently without giving any scientific backing to such general

assumptions. The principles were criticized for being ‘broad, imprecise and

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
16
Woodrow Wilson, (1887), The Study of Administration, Political Science Quarterly, Vol. 2, No. 2,
The Academy of Political Science, pp. 197 – 222, available at https://www.jstor.org/stable/2139277
accessed on 23-12-2019.
17
Ibid.
18
Ibid., p. 210.
19
Woodrow philosophically equated studying from European countries and borrowing from them to
learning how to cleverly sharpen a knife from a murderous fellow who is sharpening a knife with
the intent to murder without borrowing his intention. See p. 220.
20
Ibid., p. 218.

! 7!
unqualified, generalizations.... [as] to how one ought to act if he wished to be

efficient’ (Waldo 1963).

In his famous critique, Dahl (1947) asserted, “the comparative aspects of public

administration have largely been ignored, and as long as the study of Public

Administration is not comparative the claims of the science of Public Administration

sounds rather hollow”. Dahl bemoaned, Public Administration had been all but

oblivious to the significance of the social setting of administration and that the

limitations and hazards of such parochialism have now been recognized, and we have

entered a new era in administrative studies that stresses comparative analysis.21

Bapuji and Rao (2001) posits that Comparative Public Administration started off

with four ‘goals’ one being ‘a search of an analytical framework that permits

comparisons on a global basis among the nations’. It is admitted that nations are

drawn out to find successful methods and approaches of management to effectively

and efficiently deliver services to the people. Comparative approach is both important

and relevant to the study of Public Administration as a response to the criticisms of

parochialism and an essential tool to synthesize Public Administration with the

environment in light of the diversity that is a natural trait of the universe.

2.0 The Importance of Comparative Approach

A science must advance, solve or explain the practical issues facing the universe.

Public Administration as a social science is not exempted. Public Administration uses

the comparative approach as an integral scientific tool for collecting, identification,

classification and interpretation of data to establish similarities or differences between

states or public institutions around the globe. As a source of knowledge in social

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
21
Criticism by Robert A. Dahl, (1947) in “The Science of Public Administration” reproduced by
Jamil E. Jreisat in “Synthesis and Relevance in Comparative Public Administration”, Public
Administration Review, Vol. 35, No. 6 (Nov – Dec 1975), pp. 663 – 671.

! 8!
sciences, it represents the equivalent of the experimental method in the natural

sciences.22

Notwithstanding the intrinsic demands of scientific inquiry, the importance of a

better understanding of Public Administration across national boundaries through

comparisons cannot be understated. There is undeniable truth in what Woodrow

wrote, “the man is blindly astray who denounces attempts to transplant foreign

systems into this [US] country. It is impossible”. 23 Currently, the world is so

connected; so interdependent that not knowing what is happening in the near or far

nation-steads is not only dangerous to the political, economic and social growth of a

nation but also suicidal to the future of the very nations.

First, using the comparative approach, the study in Public Administration helps the

governments at the planning phase to know what has worked, when and where and

under what conditions. This is very important in identifying policy options. For

example, in recent years, most of the Sub-Saharan African countries commenced

wide-ranging reforms of their public administrative systems. Decentralization is one

of the vital tools to improve efficiency in public service delivery and citizen's

involvement in decision-making processes. Kenya, Uganda and Tanzania are amongst

the countries that have embarked on the decentralization reform process.24 A study by

the World Bank was carried on the premise that there is no uniform model of

decentralization applicable to all countries across the world or within a region.25 The

objective of the study was that the comparative analysis of similarities and differences

in country-specific decentralization experiences would help identify practical

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
22
Boddewyn, p. 261.
23
Woodrow, p. 218.
24
Jesper Steffensen et al., (2004), Final Synthesis Report, A Comparative Analysis of
Decentralization in Kenya, Tanzania and Uganda, World Bank, available at
https://www.documents.worldbank.org accessed on 01-01-2020.
25
Ibid.

! 9!
solutions and making existing systems of local government relations more efficient,

effective and accountable to citizens. Recommendations based on findings of the

report are useful for future planning policy evaluation processes.

Second, using a comparative approach in a study in Public Administration is

essential to inform the government on the usefulness, organization, composition and

the overall legal framework of administrative structures such as quasi-judicial

bodies/tribunals and other government agencies for better delivery of services and

governances. For example, the concept of Ombudsman in Tanzania was adopted from

the Scandinavian countries in the 1960s.26 The government established the Permanent

Commission of Enquiry in 1966 to curb maladministration in a leadership that was

fraught with embezzlement, corruption and abuse of power. It was noted that at the

time, the adoption of the system represented the first step by Tanzanian leadership to

introduce the office of Ombudsman into a new non-industrialized state.27

Third, in the same vein, at the execution (implementing) phase comparison is

essential as it may help to show the government and other stakeholders experiences

with the past, with others, with plans or norms. It provides a comprehensive

understanding of political and administrative institutions from a global perspective.

Furthermore, it offers an opportunity to develop explanations, (political, economic or

social) as to why changes occur in a particular manner or setting. For example, in the

1970s, Tanzania brought in a French approach to national planning in a setting of

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
26
Patrick M. Norton (1973), The Tanzanian Ombudsman, The International and Comparative Law
Quarterly, Vol. 22, No. 4, pp. 603-631, Cambridge University Press on behalf of the British
Institute of International and Comparative Law, available at https://www.jstor.org/stable/757658,
accessed on 02-01-2020.
27
Ibid.

! 10!
English procedures and bureaucratic style. It was observed that the “results of [this]

marriage would interest students of public administration everywhere”.28

Fourth, results from a Public Administration study using the comparative approach

may be used to facilitate the initiation of general theories and assumptions of political,
29
economic and socio-cultural relationships between countries. It offers an

opportunity to assess and evaluate different development models or theories,

processes of states and public institutions in relation to others. For example, Waldo

argues (and correctly so) that the bureaucratic model developed by Max Weber is one

of the most widely used in comparative studies. 30 Other models, such as the

structural-functionalism model by Fred Riggs and the input-out-put model by John T.

Dorsey have been developed and used comparatively.31

Fifth, the ever-increasing interdependence of nations and regions of the world

makes comparison of the conduct of administration of much more importance than the

past.32 How administration is organized or how it has succeeded or failed around the

corners of the world is not a matter of intellectual curiosity; instead, it is of immense

practical significance in other jurisdictions that may compare.33 Valuable lessons may

be drawn from events happening in the outermost corners of the world which with the

advent of globalization and universal challenges such as global warming, terrorism

and cross border crimes make them a concern to each state.

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
28
See a review titled; Comparative Public Administration published in The American Political
Science Review, Vol. 60. No. 3 (Sep., 1966), pp. 752 – 755 by the American Political Science
Association, available at https://jstor.org/stable/1952997, accessed on 23-12-2019.
29
Waldo (1968), p. 471
30
Waldo (1963), p. 196.
31
Waldo, n. 35.
32
Khan, p. 3
33
Ibid.

! 11!
 From the foregoing, it is asserted that comparative approach, despite the

limitations that comparison can be made among comparable phenomena, assumption

that phenomena are not random, opposition to viewing events as unique et cetera

(Boddewyn 1965) is important because it the best way to scientifically verify and give

credibility to the data used to show similarities and differences among administrative

systems across national boundaries.

3.0 The Relevance of Comparative Approach

Jreisat (1975) provided the beddings on the question of relevance. He observed that

“the assumption [here] is that administrative knowledge and the generation of new

knowledge should be pertinent to the fundamental problems and needs of today's

society and also useful in solving these problems and satisfying such needs”.34 He

further avers that ‘relevance’ refers to the degree of association between

generalizations and actual experiences and needs.35

Comparison is the methodological core of the humanistic and scientific method

(Almond et al. 2000). The goal of comparative approach is to explain those puzzles,

which cannot be studied without comparing and are derived from logical reasoning.36

We need to compare in order to control the observed units of variation or the variables

that make up the theoretical relationship (Sartori 1991).37 Generally, the comparative

approach is the fundamental point of departure for most theories that figure in

political and social science. In addition, the comparative method then is not only

preferred, but also required in those situations in which there is no possible recourse

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
34
Jreisat, p. 665
35
Ibid
36
The explanation is an extract from a Chapter of a book that was accessed at
https://www.uk.sagepub.com on 02-01-2020. The title of the book was not provided but the
contents summarize what the author of this paper subscribes to as to the relevance of comparative
approach to social sciences.
37
Ibid.!

! 12!
to experimental techniques or when the number of observations does not allow for the

use of statistical techniques that are based on sampling.

A comment by Michael Timberlake in his Book Review: The Comparative

Method: Moving Beyond Qualitative and Quantitative Strategies is of interest on

techniques in social science studies, “Comparative social scientists are often deeply

ambivalent about statistical techniques”.

Doing research in social sciences, that is, about people, societies, states et cetera

always implies a reduction of complexity of real life. The comparative approach is

useful to achieve this goal because it allows for controlling contextual variation.

Statistical techniques in the study of Comparative Public Administrations will be

fraught with limitations because of the nature of focus of the studies. Recurrent events

across countries that may be subject to studies usually have ‘multiple conjectural

causation i.e. a number of alternative causes each of which is comprised of a number

of conjoined events (Timberlake 1989).

It is worthy noting that in Comparative studies, comparisons are normally made

between two or more nations or between one nation and some ideal-typical model in

order to interpret social phenomena, to generalize from observations of change or

stability or to evaluate theory (Timberlake 1989). The comparative approach is

important and relevant today to the study of Public Administration. In order to

provide wider legitimacy to the discipline of Public Administration it is important that

studies be based on cross-national comparison (Khan 2008:35). A study in order to be

scientific must be based on comparison.38 The diversity of the communities of the

world ranging from their historical backgrounds, political ideologies and inclinations,

geographical locations, levels of development, cultural differences et cetera and the

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
38
Robert A. Dahl, (1963), Modern Political Analysis, New Jersey: Prentice Hall, USA.

! 13!
impact of the development of information and technology and globalization make

places the study Comparative Public Administration at a higher place today.

Meaningful comparative studies necessary for the advancement of the humankind and

solving global challenges while at the same time ensuring respect and protection of

individual rights must be conducted. The methodology used must, at the end,

scientifically verify of falsify the theory and administrative concepts developed.

REFERENCES

Books

C. Kerr et al. Industrialism and Industrial Man. New York: Oxford University Press,
1964
Dahl. R. (1963),. Modern Political Analysis. New Jersey: Prentice Hall, USA.
Itika, J. et al. (2011). Theories and Stories in African Public Administration. African
Studies Centre. Dar Es Salaam.
Khan. H. (2008). An Introduction to Public Administration, University Press of
America. Lanham. Maryland. USA.
Kothari. C. and Garg. G. (2019). Research Methodology; Methods and Techniques,
4th Edition. New Age International Publishers. London, United Kingdom.

Journal Articles

Adejare. A and Olla. (2014). Towards A Theoretical Definition of Public

Administration. Journal of Management.
Bapuji, M., and Rao. M. (2001). Revisiting Comparative Public Administration in the
Changed Context. The Indian Journal of Political Science, 62(4), 574-
584.
Boddewyn. J. (1965). The Comparative Approach to the Study of Business
Administration. The Academy of Management Journal. Vol. 8. No. 4.
Special Theme: Comparative Studies.
Jide. I., and Sheriff. F. (2013). Conceptual and Methodological Approaches to
Comparative Public Administration. International Journal of Innovative
Social Sciences & Humanities Research.
Jreisat. J. “Synthesis and Relevance in Comparative Public Administration”, Public
Administration Review, Vol. 35, No. 6.
Marume. S. B. M. (2016). Meaning of Public Administration. Journal of Research in
Humanities and Social Sciences. Vol. 4. Issue. 6.
Norton. P. M. (1973). The Tanzanian Ombudsman. The International and
Comparative Law Quarterly. Vol. 22. No. 4:

! 14!
Stafford. P. (1935). The New Amateur in Public Administration, American Political
Science Review, 29(2).
Waldo. D. (1968). Public Administration, in the Journal of Politics. Vol. 30, No. 2
Waldo. D. (1963). Comparative Public Administration: Prologue, Performance,
Problems and Promise. The Indian Journal of Political Science. Vol. 24.
No. 3. Indian Political Science Association.
Wilson. W. (1887). The Study of Administration. Political Science Quarterly. Vol. 2.
No. 2. The Academy of Political Science.

Reports/Papers

Mphahlele. L. and Erasmus. H. (2017). A Comparative Analysis of the Respective Tax

Dispute Resolution Platform Available in South Africa and Australia to
Conclude on the Adequacy of the South African Tax Dispute Resolution
Platform. Southern African Accounting Association. Drakensberg. South
Africa.
Steffensen. J. et al. (2004). Final Synthesis Report, A Comparative Analysis of
Decentralization in Kenya, Tanzania and Uganda, World Bank.

! 15!